zn is fortunate that very little of their concession is shale-as per the shale maps we've been posting
notice the article headline could not even get the revolutionary 'by' date of 2030 right -instead they said '2013'
if ppl notice some articles in haaretz are written from the palestinian point of view-trying to fracture or hinder israel society
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haaretz
from wikipedia: Haaretz:"It is known for its left-wing and liberal stances on domestic and foreign issues'
the aoc similarly in the usa voices an extreme point of view to attempt to get 100% of energy produced from renewable sources by 2030- but most recognize that pie in the sky cannot be done on that timetable
there are also ties to socialism as noted by wiki and to one world govt -which requires the usa(and israel) be weakened- a main purpose of climate accords -which give exceptions to china india russia and brazil as 'developing' countries -its just a way of weakening the usa as a necessary step to one world govt
also note -even from the non extreme press the self proclaimed role is to mold public opinion via the most inflammatory false reporting
i gave an example recently re press shouting fed will soon raise rates and shouting eco contraction in the same article-neither of which were true- completely contradictory arguments which can only play in a dumbed down populace sources are trying to create and have done a pretty good job of doing so
for an israeli 'epa' spokesperson to falsely proclaim as policy something which had been rejected as policy is reason for firing for gross insubordination-if the paper did not misconstrue the timeline of the 'epa' guys arguments
can u imagine the usa epa saying 'no fracking' and 'no more energy from oil and gas'-even those who wanted to destroy the usa didnt dare say that!!!
and in the usa such arguments should hold much more weight bc usa arguments are partly based on water tables which supply drinking water
whereas in israel their drinking water mostly comes from desalination plants now plus water upstream from the sea of galilee- from golan and above the golan -and yet the golan is one of the places the report on israel said fracking could be used!!! where most of israeli fresh water comes from!
if earthquakes were the consideration just keep fracking a certain distance from population centers-no problem in zn's concession
but nowadays most arguments dont proceed from the science -they proceed from the politics-politics decides something and then the politicos go looking for arguments- including false science -that will back them up- claiming their views are informed by the science -when in reality their science is informed and or created by their views
again,zn is fortunate that very little of zn's concession is shale-as per the shale maps we've been posting
re fracking, 'requires numerous drilling sites, with their accompanying infrastructure", recent decades technology has allowed co's to drill a dozen or more holes horizontally from the same drilling pad, thus greatly reducing surface impact and infrastructure
so the 'epa' guy is ignoring science which contradicts his views
btw,has science proved that fracking increases earthquakes-or especially the bigger earthquakes that matter?-
bc if fracking produces many small earthquakes those may be relieving stress which otherwise may have produced larger earthquakes with more damage
notice the article headline could not even get the revolutionary 'by' date of 2030 right -instead they said '2013'
if ppl notice some articles in haaretz are written from the palestinian point of view-trying to fracture or hinder israel society
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haaretz
from wikipedia: Haaretz:"It is known for its left-wing and liberal stances on domestic and foreign issues'
the aoc similarly in the usa voices an extreme point of view to attempt to get 100% of energy produced from renewable sources by 2030- but most recognize that pie in the sky cannot be done on that timetable
there are also ties to socialism as noted by wiki and to one world govt -which requires the usa(and israel) be weakened- a main purpose of climate accords -which give exceptions to china india russia and brazil as 'developing' countries -its just a way of weakening the usa as a necessary step to one world govt
also note -even from the non extreme press the self proclaimed role is to mold public opinion via the most inflammatory false reporting
i gave an example recently re press shouting fed will soon raise rates and shouting eco contraction in the same article-neither of which were true- completely contradictory arguments which can only play in a dumbed down populace sources are trying to create and have done a pretty good job of doing so
for an israeli 'epa' spokesperson to falsely proclaim as policy something which had been rejected as policy is reason for firing for gross insubordination-if the paper did not misconstrue the timeline of the 'epa' guys arguments
can u imagine the usa epa saying 'no fracking' and 'no more energy from oil and gas'-even those who wanted to destroy the usa didnt dare say that!!!
and in the usa such arguments should hold much more weight bc usa arguments are partly based on water tables which supply drinking water
whereas in israel their drinking water mostly comes from desalination plants now plus water upstream from the sea of galilee- from golan and above the golan -and yet the golan is one of the places the report on israel said fracking could be used!!! where most of israeli fresh water comes from!
if earthquakes were the consideration just keep fracking a certain distance from population centers-no problem in zn's concession
but nowadays most arguments dont proceed from the science -they proceed from the politics-politics decides something and then the politicos go looking for arguments- including false science -that will back them up- claiming their views are informed by the science -when in reality their science is informed and or created by their views
again,zn is fortunate that very little of zn's concession is shale-as per the shale maps we've been posting
re fracking, 'requires numerous drilling sites, with their accompanying infrastructure", recent decades technology has allowed co's to drill a dozen or more holes horizontally from the same drilling pad, thus greatly reducing surface impact and infrastructure
so the 'epa' guy is ignoring science which contradicts his views
btw,has science proved that fracking increases earthquakes-or especially the bigger earthquakes that matter?-
bc if fracking produces many small earthquakes those may be relieving stress which otherwise may have produced larger earthquakes with more damage
